We're dealing with the same text that we were dealing with the last time. It relates to the Broadcasting Act, amended by adding the following under subsection 22(1):
Restriction—broadcasting undertakings subject to influence
There would then be a deletion of the word “amended” in the first line and an insertion after “foreign programming, that is”. The insertion is:
—despite any measure that the Commission could take under this Part—
It continues with the original text, “vulnerable to being” adding, “significantly influenced”. The term “significantly” is added.
The rest of the text remains intact.
In terms of motivating this, there are a number of points that are important.
One is that the language removes the term “amended”, which is actually a salutary piece of language because it allows for the problem to be rectified through an amendment to the actual documents in question. Therefore the problem would be solved.
Two is that, with respect to the renewal or the issuance of a licence, the CRTC has other supervisory regulatory powers. The insertion of “despite any measure that the Commission could take under this Part” would acknowledge that the CRTC already has embedded in it some measures that allow for the problem that we're addressing here to be solved. It simply acknowledges that that there are internal mechanisms.
Three, the term “significantly” is an important addition to the text that's already there, because the influence that we are looking at should be significant. We need to have a measure around this and not have a minor influence being the threshold. There should be a significant influence that is a threshold with respect to this act.
This doesn't take away from anything that Mr. Lawrence is putting forth. This simply tightens it up a little and makes it clearer. It keeps the full spirit of what Mr. Lawrence is bringing forth with respect to legislation in this particular section.